1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Portuguese
  4. >
  5. "Nós vamos usar nosso tempo p…

"Nós vamos usar nosso tempo para ler."

Translation:We will use our time to read.

August 5, 2013



Little flexibility here: "We will use our time for reading" is wrong. "We will use our time to read" is OK


Just report it in order to expand the answer pool.


I had the same problem just now and have reported it. Strange that it hasn't been repaired in those 2 years!


I was always taught that in English the first person in the future was 'shall' rather than 'will', but this is indicated as wrong. It is not the first time I have come across this. While 'will' may be considered an alternative, 'shall' is not wrong.


English grammar books taught this rule forty years ago:

  1. "Shall" is used for the first person, singular and plural, to indicate the simple future tense. "Will" is for the second and third persons, singular and plural, for the simple future.
    ex: I shall stay. He will go.

  2. To express determination or making a promise, "Will" is used in the first person, singular and plural, and "shall" is used for the second and third persons.
    ex: I will help. / You shall have your reward. / He shall not pass by here again.

Those rules are no longer applied. In present-day English, "Shall" is generally used to make suggestions. ex: "Shall we leave at 8:30 for NY? / "Shall I open the window for you?"

Of course, you can still use "shall" for the simple future for the first person. It's correct, formal English.

source: Harbrace Handbook of English


Thanks for this very clear, helpful information. In conclusion, although the old rules are no longer applied 'shall' is not incorrect.


...and a seemingly archaic usage, with the same structure in both languages: You shall (thou shalt) not kill = Tu não matarás! Is this still used nowadays? (The question also concerns Portuguese.)


Actually in common speech in England we tend to say "I'll" which is short for either and doesn't require anyone to know whether we've used the wrong one!


Couldn't it be "Let's use our time to read."?


In this case, "Nós" is not added to the sentence.


Let's = let us .. it's not "we" but it has the same meaning, doesn't it?


I might be wrong...

  • "Nós vamos..." implies a future action.
  • "Vamos..." may also imply a future action, but when it translates "Let's", it is closer to a "soft imperative", isn't it?


Yes. "Let's" is a "soft" imperative or an informal suggestion. Let's = vamos. It does not have the same meaning as "let us".


Thanks for comfirming, emeyr! :-)


Is "para" necessary here? Can we drop it and just use "ler"?


You have to use "para" when you show the purpose of something, so it is required here.

Learn Portuguese in just 5 minutes a day. For free.